Posted on 02/21/2012 7:12:42 AM PST by Marguerite
That’s the REAL reason why Santorum lost his incumbent Senate reelection in 2006 by such a wide margin 41% to 59% - because of the residency dispute and the school tuition fraud.
In Pennsylvania in the leadup to the 2006 race, people were extremely angry over Santorum’s empty Pittsburgh house and Santorum receiving dozens of thousands of dollars in tuition reimbursement.
You may wish that were true but that is exactly what happened! Newt showed us all who is before the FL primary and his descent has been the consequence. If my analysis is sooo bad why don't you provide your own? How did Newt fall so low after telling us all to just accept the inevitablity of his being the nominee? Let me guess...obama's HHS blunder? Not even close.
According to you, when others point out Santorum’s very Moderate Big Government insider history, as well as the issues he has that contradict the image, you and he is trying to sell to the ignorant public, that is designated as a “Smear” and is untrue because you say so. (”Liberal Drivel”)
But when you smear Newt, you are merely pointing out that it is an “argument” and quite necessary as well as appropriate.........(OK, what else can you define for the rest of the World?)
... on Pennsylvania taxpayers’ $100,000 tuition money, while he and family lived in Virginia, where he still lives today.
Wow. You keep raising the refund. Is that because the truthful amount is not as dramatic for your agenda?
You missed the point. Yeah, the Santorums have a lot of kids. If they sent the kids to public school we’d be talking about double the $7,000 per kid you mention.
The other point you ignored is that the actual marginal cost (to the system as a whole) of adding kids to a cyber program is gonna be a lot less than $7,000 per kid.
We should be thanking the Santorums for having enough children to help keep Social Security solvent for a while longer. The amount they will pay into the system over time will dwarf the $7,000 per kid you are talking about now.
Of course, this isn’t the kind of issue that real people typically pick a presidential nominee on.
How about you support Newt (whom has expenditure issues of his own) or attack Obama oer Romney instead? Your posts are not helpign conservatives get a nominee.
(When I'm good, I am very, very good. But! When I'm bad, I'm even more destructive and rotten to the core)
She’d rather have Zero reelected
Or . . . Santorum could take a lesson from W (or Kerry) and just let the attacks multiply, spread, and morph. I agree it wastes time in some cases, but the lies need to be corrected fast. Ignoring them validates them.
You’re most welcome. I’ll accept your last line as an open invitation to correct your error whenever I spot them. I don’t know that I have the time but I’ll do my best.
“You’d rather have Pres. Romney??”
Rick Santorum is a social conservative but other than that he is a big government republican. He will do nothing to cut the size and scope of govt.
I’d rather have Newt. The only candidate who has a plan to hit the ground running on day one to restore the constitutional republic.
In about 2 years we will be Greece if we don’t get a grown up in the Oval Office.
dozens of thousands
LOL.............
More experienced than Obama...check
Was not mentored by racists....check
Was not mentored by people who hate America....check
No history of cocaine abuse.....check
Easily verifiable history....check....
....wait, WE are the crazy ones?!?
In looking at your posts, you have also bashed Newt. So since you are against Santorum, Newt, and Mitt, who does that leave? RuPaul?
I’m pragmatic. We’ll see
Is anybody watching the House or SENATE?!
We should be watching the congressional races. The more we focus on all the races the harder it is for the MSM to distract us.
A majority (filibuster proof) majority essentially eunachs the entire WH.
The democrats may howl “power sharing” and “peaceful coexistance” but the only viable AMERICAN solution is to crush the democrat party electorally out of existence.
Worse than that.
How did a man who:
...attended a racist 'church' for 20 years
...launched his political career in the living room of an admitted domestic terrorist
...voted to deny medical care to newborns who survived a partial birth abortion
...had the most radically leftwing voting record in congress
become president?
Yet here we are again, ripping our own candidates to shreds over his conventionally christian beliefs, or his two failed marraiges, or perceived innapropriate comments made to women made years ago, or being mistaken about Elvis's birthplace.
I'm so sick of this crap, sick of our side making the same mistakes & eating our own, election after election. I'm to the point now where I'm praying I wake up one day not caring anymore.
You never did answer my questions from the other day:
Before the fla primary, newt won South Carolina, and part of his win was turnout increased by 22%, and there were also turnout increases in the Florida counties where he won. Newt withstood 17 million dollars of negative advertising in Florida, much of it vicious, nearly all of it false or borderline. The ad ratio was 65/1 against Newt. THAT’s what happened to Newt. he is now building back, and you know what? When people give him a fair look, which doesn’t happen often here because of all the belligerence, stubborness and stuck in gear folks here, they like him, and he wins them over. People like you trade in stereotrypes and the past when it comes to Newt. Young people, and openminded people at least give him an honest look and many many come away converted.
After our pleasant conversation yerterday I thought I would take this opportunity to provide some background on the 2006 election that you're not going to get from the charliesheen media.
Santorum in 2006 ran into a "perfect storm" that resulted in an epic defeat. The elements of that storm were:
1. W was under intense fire over Iraq(this was pre-Surge) and Santorum was in direct line of fire
2. Santorum, at the urging of W, supported Arlen Spincter which PO'd PA conservatives (this support resulted in Roberts and Alioto on the USSC)
3. The PA GOP was under the thumb of Ellsie Hillman, and to a lesser extend Theresea Heinz, both of whom HATED Santorum for his pro-life position. Furthermore, the Pres. of the PA GOP, a guy named Gleason, was/is a certified RINO who unofficially supported Murtha in his House race.
4. The dims cynically ran Bob Casey Jr, son of stauch pro-life late PA Gov Bob Casey (of the important USSC decision Casey vs PA)and sold him as pro-life! Jr is a non-entity but his pappa was well-loved (hell, I voted for the guy!).
5. Santorum had risen to a prominent roll in the Senate as a conservative bulldog and tore apart B Boxer in a partial birth abortion debate on the Senate Floor. That put him in the DNC cross-hairs and there was a lot of national $$ pumped into Jr's campaign chest.
But the final, fatal, nail in the coffin was that Santorum was working hard w/ W on Social Security Reform. As we all know, SS is the famous 3rd rail, touch it and die.
Santorum had the brass to address SS in an honest fashion in an atttempt to pull it back from the brink it's currently tilting over.
PA is one of the most elderly states in the country. The dims scared the old folks (patent pending) & the rest is history.
I invite you and other Newt supporters to take an honest look at Santorum, but I'll tell you this: he is both a social and a fiscal conservative.
and he ain't afraid.
What was wrong or incorrect with Santorum's remarks about Obami?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.